Talk:Arbitration/Archives/2013

Untitled
This page really needs to cite sources, I'm want to know about the Jay Treaty, who filled this role, and how it was settled, yet alas... no citation.

A proposed outline
The article has now been moved to Arbitration in the United States of America, as everyone seemed to think it ought. I've put a stub here as a filler - let's keep in mind that the article on arbitration generally should be as internationalist as possible. Here's what I think we should have here: Does that look like something we could use as a starting point? -- Arvind 10:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The arbitral process
 * the nature of arbitration / features common to all types of arbitration
 * the arbitrators
 * the arbitral award
 * Specific types of arbitration
 * Commercial arbitration
 * History
 * Special features
 * International commercial arbitration (this will probably need an article of its own - this section should only provide an overview)
 * Investor-state arbitration
 * Labour arbitration
 * Arbitration between states
 * Other types of arbitration (family arbitration, consumer arbitration, etc.)
 * Major arbitral institutions


 * Sounds like a decent starting point to me. There are probably a few other sub-headings that can go in later (appeals; International arbitation bodies, etc.) but we can refine it as we go. Legis 16:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Question: why is there no title for Small Claims Arbitration?. I might be wrong but i think it is relevant, i have only found Small Claims Court in wikipedia, but arbitration and court are 2 dif things, plus why is it coneected only with the USA?. Pouloudi (talk) 11:56, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

added link to arbitration comittee
I've added a link to the arbitration comittee on this page. It is quite standard to add things like that to pages such as vandalism, guideline, point of view, etc. Please discuss it if you want to delete this obvious addition. Fresheneesz 00:40, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I've noticed that you've been adding a hat note on top of the Arbitration article. This is not the best course of action, since we really don't need to advertise our committee on that page, plus I don't think people go to the Arbitration article looking for our ArbCom. Please take a look at WP:ASR for more details. —     00:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I did. The link to Avoid Self References was not especially useful. After searching about, a link to Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes or Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration down in the see-also might be appropriate as a link into that corner of the dispute resolution process. Or this comment will point others into the correct phrasings. htom 13:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * For what it is worth, my view is that there should be a header link to some page related to Wikipedia arbitration procedure. If the problem is too many Wikipedia arbitration requests, I don't think that the appropriate solution is to conceal the existence of the committee. --Legis (talk - contributions) 12:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Content
I have added a chunk of content to this article about legalities of arbitration (and removed the stub). I am mindful of the criticisms that were made of the last article that was here (before it was pushed out to "Arbitration in the United States of America", so I have tried to keep it as "international" as I can, but obviously I am limited to what I know. Accordingly, it could still need help in a couple of directions: Legis 14:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If any lawyers from other jurisdictions can add anything in relation to the international perspective, that would help broaden the article; and
 * It is very much a legal article at the moment - it would add greatly to the value of the article if someone could add facts and/or figure in relation to the commercial aspects of arbitration.

Wow....
I have just heard from a professor saying that arbitration is not science. If this is true, why universities teach the law and psychology about arbitration?

http://www.athabascau.ca/html/syllabi/idrl/idrl304.htm

http://www.law.cam.ac.uk/courses/llm/settlement_of_international_disputes.php

http://www.law.missouri.edu/aalsadr/DR_syllabi.htm

Self Reference
Why was the self reference removed? --Htmlism 21:38, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Nothing about Roman law
It is very strange, but there is nothing about Roman law here. As I understand, arbitrage is a bright example of roman institution surviving in modern society. It was quite well known in medieval France, so the french (in fact, roman) influence on England should also be considered. Please correct me if I'm not right. Michael Grinberg 10:17, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Careful not to confuse two distinct concepts: arbitrage and arbitration are very different things! I wasn't aware of use of arbitration under Roman law, but if it was, then clearly it should go into the article under the "history" section. --Legis (talk - contribs) 10:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You are right. It is the Romans (and the Greeks) who first used arbitration as we do today. I have added two (indirect) references until some better become available.--As286 22:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I know an exact passage in the Digests regulating arbitration. Shall I supply a link? Isn't it "original research? I think its absolutely trivial and common knowledge, though. As for arbitrage and arbitration I would really like to know for sure what means what. I'm conducting research on the old french Coutumes de Beauvaisis, where "arbitrage" just means "arbitration"... Would be nice to trace the entire etymology of both. Michael Grinberg (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Structure
I have made relatively small changes in the way the article is organized. I have grouped one or two bits under the title "Applicable laws" and a few more sentences to that. I have also added a section on sources. My feeling is that more needs to be said about:

--As286 21:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ad hoc versus institutional arbitration
 * challenges to awards during and after proceedings
 * UNCITRAL Model Law and UNCITRAL Model Rules

New Arbitration Centre...
I've just read, that a new Arbitration Centre with focus on Chinese-European trade disputes has been inaugurated. Maybe a link to this centre should be added Chinese European Arbitration Centre.

Plotin (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

advantages and disadvantages
Some of the advantages are disadvantages and vice versa. For example, in some cases, prolonging the dispute is in one party's advantage. This isn't being cynical, this is the truth. Chergles (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

In Simple English please?
Some people may want just the facts on this article, myself being one of them. It wouldn't be a bad thing to help us mere mortals out, methinks. :)

96.230.240.112 (talk) 20:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposal
The current contents of List of international arbitration books, only three entries, be included in a Further reading section of this article. --Mike Cline (talk) 17:28, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ..."List of international arbitration books" is a literally useless article. In fact, why don't we just delete it, instead of merging? Aimsplode (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The books listed are now referenced in this article. As per Aimsplode, the list article should be deleted. And I note that all but one of the books listed deal with international arbitration.  So, this article should have a short section on international arb, with a "See main" hatnote to International arbitration rather than being listed in the see alsos.--S. Rich (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't really have a drive to put things on here, but think the list would be a useful resource for someone attempting to research the subject (there's no similar list out there). The AAA is an oversees domestic and international arbitrations (through the ICDR), so all the books are about international arbitration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iammaggieryan (talk • contribs) 13:02, 20 April 2012 (UTC)